so, about these "retirements"
are they just a way for the player to get out of their current contract?

/seems hinkey

Stephen A. Smith is a LOUSY journalist.

namatad: are they just a way for the player to get out of their current contract?

Not really, he was already bought out of his contract anyway. He's technically not "retired" because he's not even required to file papers with the league office, as a free agent. The only time you have to file the papers in the NBA is if you ARE under contract, and if you do that, you can't play for another team for a year.

Hell, the Sixers are so awful right now, I don't think they have anything to lose by getting him back.

IAmRight: He's technically not "retired" because he's not even required to file papers with the league office, as a free agent. The only time you have to file the papers in the NBA is if you ARE under contract, and if you do that, you can't play for another team for a year.


a bit of a threadjack, but your post reminded me of the Suns being butthurt last year about Brent Barry or some guy that the Spurs traded away to Team X, and then Team X cut him making him a free agent....the Suns were looking to add him but per league rule, if he was unsigned for like, 60 days (or some period) then any team could sign him.

his choices ended up being Suns or Spurs, and he chose Spurs. So the Suns were mad that in essence, he was traded for himself. Not literally of course but the local guys said that was the understanding all along between the Spurs and Team X. "Take his contract, dump it, then we'll get him back." And some in the Suns 'chise griped that the NBA needed to rectify this because it happened a few times in the league.

/boring story bro

rickythepenguin: a bit of a threadjack, but your post reminded me of the Suns being butthurt last year about Brent Barry or some guy that the Spurs traded away to Team X, and then Team X cut him making him a free agent....the Suns were looking to add him but per league rule, if he was unsigned for like, 60 days (or some period) then any team could sign him.

Wasn't it like the Sonics for Kurt Thomas, after the Suns gave away something like 2 first rounders and Thomas for a 2nd rounder because their owner is a cheap cocksucker? So basically they gave the Spurs their best defensive player for free, pissed away two draft picks, and the Spurs didn't even have to give anyone up?

*checks*

Yup. That's exactly what it was. F*cking Sarver, I hope that guy gets ass cancer.

IAmRight: Wasn't it like the Sonics for Kurt Thomas,


No, it was definitely one of those Barry cats. Drew or Brent or some shiat.

It was pretty much a daily topic about what team would get him. Steve Kerr was on his jock for weeks and then the guy went back to the Spurs, and that's when the rumblings about "this was all a setup, the Spurs and Team X must've planned thsi out" because Spurs got cap relief and the player back.

like i said after it happened the local media were pretty upset about it. said the rule should be changed that you can't go back to the team that traded you for a season instead of the 30 or 60 days, whatever. on day 30+1 or 60+1, dude went back to Spurs.

IAmRight: Wasn't it like the Sonics for Kurt Thomas


Oh wait. You are right. I didn't know Thomas was in that deal. My bag. My bag, bro.

ESPNs recap of the "Brent Barry gets traded for himself" deal (new window)

The Spurs, who traded Barry to the Seattle SuperSonics last Thursday as part of their package for forward Kurt Thomas, are set to reacquire him after he was released by the Sonics and cleared waivers Tuesday, according to a newspaper report.


I don't remember it happening this way....there was some angle about him (Barry) having to wiat like, 30 or 60 days. Ehhh. I don't care.

/spent far too much time on this laready

Toots McGee: Hell, the Sixers are so awful right now, I don't think they have anything to lose by getting him back.

Yeah, they might even sell a few tickets. Probably not as many as they think, but whatever. There's always the Knicks and the Nets, so they'll win some games.

rickythepenguin: It was pretty much a daily topic about what team would get him. Steve Kerr was on his jock for weeks and then the guy went back to the Spurs, and that's when the rumblings about "this was all a setup, the Spurs and Team X must've planned thsi out" because Spurs got cap relief and the player back.

It's nice for the Spurs that every GM involved in the situation worked for the Spurs before they got their new job.

I don't care if he's retired or not. The most significant thing he's done with his life is inspire DJ Steve Porter's Press Hop. (new window)

TheBaldOneMpls: I don't care if he's retired or not. The most significant thing he's done with his life is inspire DJ Steve Porter's Press Hop. (new window)

That is catchy....for the last month every time I hear A.I's name that song gets stuck in my head.

/Strrruuuggggling

bronyaur1: Stephen A. Smith is a LOUSY journalist.

This.

Also, an attention-seeking child. I am so glad he got booted from ESPN, he was the most annoying person on TV. I had hoped that was all I would hear from him. He has had to make all this shiat happen just to get back in the spotlight. Pissant.

As for AI - he was a great player and I was stoked when he started playing for my team (Nuggets), because I would be able to go watch him live.

Then I was stoked when he left because that was the only way we would be able to get out of the first round of the playoffs.

He is a one-man scoring machine - still - but does not share well. He does play reasonably good defence, but his size alone makes him a defensive liability, and he is more interested in getting steals than just playing straight-up D. And he was not a good role model for young players like JR Smith and Melo.

I think he should be a starter, somewhere with a good defence, experienced players with a good work ethic, but a low-performing offence. Philly sounds like a good option on almost all aspects.

bronyaur1: Stephen A. Smith is a LOUSY journalist.

Every time Screamin' A. Smith shows up on my tube there is always a mad scramble to find the remote ASAP.

Retirements.... Retirements... Listen I am a franchise player being signed to a team and we are talking about retirements?

namatad 2009-11-28 11:21:04 AM so, about these "retirements" are they just a way for the player to get out of their current contract? /seems hinkey
============================================

I know in Football you can't. Favre was placed on a retired list but would've still been under contract to the Jets. Only because he talked the Jets into releasing him was he able to play for the Vikings this year.


As for Iverson, he only stated that because no one was interested, he might as well quit. Nothing actually happened formally. He just was pissed no one called. Now someone called. Everything is all fine again.

Sorta like Morten Andersen's retirement. He didn't retire because he wanted to, he retired because no one called. Course, he was 48 years old. AI is like 34 :)

AP Source: Iverson retirement may be brief
By DAN GELSTON, AP Sports Writer
4 hours, 48 minutes ago

From "DUH" magazine.

Another farking way to lose for Philly.

Stay classy, Gay-I...

Perhaps it was a practice retirement?

/setting someone up nicely.

"We sittin' in here, I supposed to be franchise player, we in here tawkin' 'bout practice." Link (new window)

Thanks to TheBaldOneMpls for hookin' me up with the remix! Awesome! (and the SlapChopRap is amazing, too Link (new window)

shlabotnik: bronyaur1: Stephen A. Smith is a LOUSY journalist.

Every time Screamin' A. Smith shows up on my tube there is always a mad scramble to find the remote ASAP.

SAS probably colluded with AI to start this story. AI used SAS's website to announce the retirement. And now going back to Philly...hmm.